What is seen as a symbol of pride in one country may be viewed as a provocation in another. Reflecting on the recent controversy over a footballer’s hand gesture linked to Turkish nationalism, Süleyman Güngör explores how physical expressions of cultural identity triggered international tensions
In round 16 of Euro 2024, Turkish footballer Merih Demiral scored two goals against Austria to seal Turkey's place in the quarter-finals. He celebrated his second with the Turkish nationalist hand gesture known as the 'grey wolf salute'. UEFA swiftly issued a two-match ban, deeming the gesture 'inappropriate' and politically charged. Yet for many Turks, the punishment felt disproportionate — a misreading of cultural identity as extremism.
Germany's Interior Minister condemned the gesture, linking it to extreme right-wing movements. In response, Turkish leaders accused European institutions of overreacting, politicising a symbol they view as part of their shared cultural heritage. What started as a jubilant moment on the pitch quickly became a flashpoint in a wider debate over identity, expression, and geopolitical sensitivities.
To understand why the grey wolf salute resonates in Turkey, we must examine its historic associations. The wolf is a foundational figure in Turkic mythology. In the ancient legend of Asena, a she-wolf rescues a wounded boy, nurses him back to health, and gives birth to the ancestors of the Turkish nation. In the Ergenekon legend, a wolf guides a trapped tribe out of a mountain valley, leading them to freedom.
Across Turkic cultures — from Anatolia to Central Asia — the wolf symbolises guidance, strength, and survival. In the Kyrgyz epic Manas, warriors are often compared to wolves. Folk traditions also revere the animal: amulets made from wolf teeth or fur are believed to offer protection against evil.
For many, the grey wolf is a national totem — a symbol of unity and endurance deeply woven into Turkish collective memory
This reverence predates modern ideologies. For many, the grey wolf is a national totem — a symbol of unity and endurance deeply woven into Turkish collective memory.
The grey wolf salute is often associated with the Nationalist Movement Party (MHP) and its youth wing, the Grey Wolves. But its use is not confined to one party. Politicians from the social democratic Republican People’s Party (CHP), the Good Party (İYİ Parti), and the Victory Party (Zafer Partisi) have also used the gesture in public. Its cross-party appearance suggests that for many Turks, the salute expresses national pride rather than partisan ideology.
Following UEFA’s sanction, the Turkish city of Bolu erected a statue of Merih Demiral giving the grey wolf salute. The city’s social democratic mayor commissioned the statue; further evidence that the salute’s cultural resonance extends well beyond the far right, as an emblem of collective identity.
Outside Turkey, however, many see the gesture differently. Several European countries, including Germany and Austria, have debated or enacted bans on making the gesture, which they view as a sign of ultranationalism or extremism.
Several European countries have debated or enacted bans on making the grey wolf salute, which they view as a sign of ultranationalism or extremism
Turkish officials argue that banning the gesture constitutes cultural censorship. Demiral himself stated, 'I am proud to be a Turk, and I just wanted to show that'. Demiral stressed that he did not intend his salute to antagonise any particular group or nation. The Turkish Ministry of Foreign Affairs backed him, confirming that the gesture was not intended to express hostility.
This divergence in interpretation highlights a broader challenge in multicultural Europe: the tension between symbolic expression and perceived political threat.
The Demiral incident was not the first time UEFA’s disciplinary consistency has come under scrutiny. During the 2018 World Cup, Swiss players Granit Xhaka and Xherdan Shaqiri made the Albanian 'double-headed eagle' gesture after scoring against Serbia.
The gesture is a reference to the eagles on the Albanian flag, asserting Albanian identity amid ongoing ethnic tensions in the Balkans. Xhaka and Shaqiri received modest fines, but no bans.
Demiral, by contrast, got a two-game suspension. Clearly, UEFA’s criteria for distinguishing between 'acceptable' and 'unacceptable' symbolism lack consistency.
UEFA has in the past supported symbolic acts such as ‘taking the knee’ against racism and wearing rainbow armbands to support LGBTQ+ rights. These gestures have been celebrated as inclusive and progressive. Yet Demiral’s salute, rooted in national mythology, is treated as political provocation.
The inconsistency risks creating the impression that some identities and cultural expressions are more acceptable than others in international sport.
Symbolic gestures in sport can be empowering, and polarising. A sign of heritage for one community may register as a threat in another. In pluralistic societies — and international competitions — symbols gather conflicting meanings as they travel across borders.
In Turkey, the grey wolf salute connects to centuries-old myths and modern expressions of identity. European countries may see the gesture as a contemporary political threat. Navigating this gap demands cultural literacy.
Merih Demiral’s gesture was a symbol of cultural pride rooted in myth, memory, and identity. Despite its associations with one political movement, the gesture resonates widely across Turkish society. Figures from the social democratic Republican People’s Party (CHP), as well as the Good Party and the Victory Party have all been pictured making it. The gesture’s cross-party appeal suggests that it carries a meaning that for many citizens goes well beyond partisan lines.
UEFA has rightly embraced anti-racist kneeling and rainbow armbands as symbols of inclusion. Yet its swift sanctioning of the grey wolf salute risks reinforcing the perception that certain identities are less worthy of public expression than others.
Banning expressions without understanding their origins flattens complex cultural narratives and undermines genuine inclusivity
When symbols travel across borders, they gather layers of meaning. A gesture of pride in one country may be viewed as a provocation in another. But banning expressions without understanding their origins flattens complex cultural narratives and undermines genuine inclusivity.
Respecting diversity requires more than tolerance — it calls for contextual understanding. In Demiral's case, empathy and nuance might have done more to ease tensions than censure. In an increasingly interconnected world, true inclusivity begins not with suppression, but with listening.
